These are private notes from controversial questions (ONLY) and not expert opinions that I share public! If you pick qualms, please write a rebuttal, and I will post it right here or send me what you want added or taken out. I am willing to debate anybody. The pictures and videos are from the internet public domain and belong to their owners. If you don’t want them here, advise. My hope is that you will know about life, life after death and eventually meet Christ.

Saturday, September 26, 2015

The
confusion emanates from the usage of the word “sin.” There is sin (make, kind)
and acts of sins (model, type). For example, a teacher and the different
specialties like Science teacher, Arts teacher, Social Studies teacher and Math teacher. In this teaching, there are some that have a high employment rate,
but there are others that don’t. Sin is defined as missing the mark. That
begins from birth (Psalm 51:5; Rom 3:23). It happened through the Federal Head
Theory. One man (Adam) sinned and the
sinned goes down to the entire human race (Romans 5:12). Thenceforth, everyone
is born a sinner. However, sin is manifested in these four ways: when you act
out of faith, when you knowingly refused to do good, when you transgress the
law and when you do unrighteous acts. Nonetheless, there are some sins that are
not only spiritually damning, they are physically destructive. This paper will
exemplify the kinds and types of sins and also show why some are pardonable and
others are not. I will start with types.

Any faithlessness
is sin (Romans 14:23). It is a sin to doubt if something is right, yet you do
it. When there is confusion between your synderisis and syneidesis, faith takes
precedence because you have failed to live by even the law. Since no man is
saved by the law, then he must survive by grace. If you fail to use grace, then
you have missed the mark.

Deliberately
refusing to do good works (James 4:17). Not doing the good works, like refusing
to keep yourself healthy is sin. It is a sin to know something is right, yet
you don’t do it because you should always do the right thing when you know it
and can. It is good works that will shine for people to see and know that you
have believed in God so they can give glory to Him. They cannot enter into your
heart to ascertain if you have believed or not.

Sin is
transgression of the law (I John 3:4). Let
me put it this way; missing the mark is not fulfilling the law (the law of
God). That is why some people may not have had the Ten Commandments to
fulfill the law, yet they did it anyway because God is everywhere, and He has
written his law in the hearts of all people; their consciences bear them
witness as their thoughts accuse or defend them sometimes. Whether you believe
in God or not, there is a time when the things that you do undo go trial in
your heart, and it is your conscience that is the sitting judge, while your
thoughts act as the lawyers.

All
unrighteousness is sin (I Jn 5:17). Do you remember when Micah was confused
about what to give God? God told him this, “… to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk
humbly with thy God (Micah 6:8).” The first thing was justice. Any injustice is
sin. This requires you to act equitably in word and in deeds. Racism is not an
act of righteousness because it is total injustice! Those who practice and
benefit from the windfalls of racism are constantly and deliberately living in sin.
The benefactors are likened to recipients of stolen goods.

Every
human being is still guilty of the examples I described. However, while the
original sin mentioned in Psalm 51:5 and Romans 3:23 are taken away when you
confess with your mouth and believe with your heart in Christ (Romans 10:9-10, 13), you can act
out the other examples which you appropriate forgiveness by confessing and
forsaking your sins (Proverbs 28:13). Despite the availability of absolution
through the salvific plan of the messianic sacrifice, some are not forgiven, the
blasphemy against the Holy Spirit and the continuous rejection of grace by
deliberately living in sin (Hebrews 10:26). Here is why blasphemy against the
Holy Spirit is unpardonable.

By
refusing a known fact about God or Jesus, is refuting the existence of that fact;
thus, constituting blasphemy. When any one rejects the suffering of Christ (Is
53:3-6; 2 Cor 1:5-7; 15:3; Heb 2:10; 5:8; 9:28; I Pet 1:11; 2:24-25; 4:13; 5:1),
they are blaspheming against God. In other words, they are saying the Bible is
telling lies; thus, God is a liar. The Bible talks more about the
suffering of Christ than the joy of the Master. To negate the existence of his
suffering through which we are redeemed means that they are not acknowledging
the source of their salvation; consequently, such will definitely die in their sins.
That is the reason why blaspheming against the Holy Spirit is unpardonable. The
sin in itself plunges you into eternal damnation.

There
is also a second occasion where the quality of our sins is different. That is
where homosexuality comes in. If we deliberately keep missing the mark, even
when we have obtained salvation, there will no more be any sacrifice. For
example, if you believe in Christ, yet you are living in homosexuality which
refuses to procreate, which is an ordnance of God.

Having
kids out of wedlock is unrighteousness that is sin but not unto death (venial)
I Jn 5:17, unlike blasphemy against the Holy Spirit which is a mortal sin (I Jn
5:16 and Mt 12:31). Furthermore, there
are two kinds of sins: venial and mortal (I Jn 5:16) because some sins
like adultery can be forgiven, even if they have no means of restitution;
meanwhile, others cannot. They affect the soul of the doer directly!

To decorticate the meaning of 1 John 5:16-17,
we must keep these verses parallel to Romans 3:23; 6:23, “All have sinned and
come short of the glory of God;” “The wages of sin is death, but the gift of
God is eternal life through Christ our Lord.” Consequently, every sin leads
unto spiritual death. How then can there be sin that does not lead unto death
and one that does? The verse means, there is sin that has been marked out as
unpardonable (which is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit), and there is another
one like those above that are not. Those that can obtain mercy are venial; whereas,
the ones that cannot obtain mercy are mortal. Sexual sins are egregious and
spiritually mortal (I Corinthians 6:18), but they are not the mortal sin (hamartia)
per se.

It is important to remember that the body is regarded
as the temple of God. Thus, other sins touch the outer court of the temple, but
sexual sins enter further into the Holy of Holies. How? When you commit sexual
sin, you take the temple (your body), wherein God lives and you join it with a
harlot. Therefore, you are forcing the Lord to join himself to evil. Since God
does not share his glory with man, he servers himself from the defaulter. That
body becomes unredeemable at the moment of the sin. When the individual rejoins
himself or herself to God through confession which serves as absolution, they
bring with them physical and spiritual woes. Consequently, Solomon said, “Butwhoso
committeth adultery with a woman lacketh understanding: hethat doeth it destroyeth his own soul.
A wound and dishonour shall he get; and his reproach shall not be wiped away
(Proverbs 6:32-33).” Sexual sins are a direct
spiritual attack against God because sex is a spiritual act and not a physical
one.

You must
note why sexual sin is against the body. When we believe in Christ, we become
one spirit in body (I Cor 6:17). We demonstrate our union in water baptism (Rom
6:4-6) and then proceed to acquire spiritual power in Holy Ghost Baptism (Mt
3:11; Mk. 1:8; Lk. 3:16; Jn. 1:33; Acts 1:5, 2, 11:16; I Cor. 12:13). Thus, we
are married to God. When we commit sexual immorality, we have sinned. It is
like adultery; meanwhile, “thou shall not commit adultery (Ex 20:7).” It means
that we have broken the vow; whereas marriage brings oneness (Gen 2:24). At
that moment, we create two bodies. That is why you are asked to flee rather
than resist (I Cor 6:18; Col 3:5; 2 Tim 2:22; 1 Pet 2:11). It is the only sin
where you cannot stand to fight; you must only flee because no mortal; no
matter how disciplined and holy they have been, has ever fought and won the sin
of sex. To win the fight, you must not even fight it; you must flee from it.
The church fathers used a phrase “Alia vitia pugnando, sola libido fugiendo
vincitur” meaning that “all other sins could be conquered by fighting, but
sexual sin is by flight only.”

Now you
understand that when sex takes place, we entangle our spirits with the
individual we are having sex. Do you remember, “Do not be unequally yoked with
unbelievers, for what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness, or what
fellowship has light with darkness (2 Cor 6:14)?” You also understand that
blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is unpardonable. Therefore, all sins are not
equal. Although every crime is punishable, but some are more punishable than
others.

Until
then, I hope I made the distinction that all sins do not have the same weight.

Sty
Arrey of Ntenako.

“Bonyfish beware because the same net that caught the jawless fish, caught the cartilaginous fish” (Hamilton Ayuk).
Beware earthly paradise seekers because there is a serpent in every paradise"(Hamilton Ayuk).
"If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." (I Cor 15:19).
"It is not how well you know a person; it is how well you treat them that they will live longer and happier with you." Hamilton Ayuk.
Idle people write, idler people read, and idlest people read and whine that idle people are taking their time (Hamilton Ayuk).

“Bonyfish beware because the same net that caught the jawless fish, caught the cartilaginous fish” (Hamilton Ayuk).

Beware earthly paradise seekers because there is a serpent in every paradise"(Hamilton Ayuk).
"If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." (I Cor 15:19).
"It is not how well you know a person; it is how well you treat them that they will live longer and happier with you." Hamilton Ayuk.
Idle people write, idler people read, and idlest people read and whine that idle people are taking their time (Hamilton Ayuk).

Monday, September 14, 2015

While I do not support
Kim Davis’ refusal to sign marriage licenses, it is my belief that Gregg
Easterbrook is wrong in his interpretation and application of the verses that
prohibit gay marriage. The bible is unequivocally forthright about
homosexuality. My task is to show how he has quoted the bible amok and applied
it amiss.

The author tries to give
his article more credibility by stating that he is merely going to cite from
the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV). If anyone knows about translations and
the history thereof, they will agree that the reason the NRSV is widely acclaimed
is mainly because it is more ecumenical than any other version since it is much
more dynamically equivalent than any other version out there. Those for
ecumenism outnumber those against, so it is proper to have an ecumenical tool
as the flag bearer. That does not diminish the quality of the translation. It
is no doubt a very good translation because it accommodates almost all
denominations. Notwithstanding, the NRSV does not surpass the King James
Version; it rather actualizes it.

He correctly points out
the prohibition of homosexuality in the Old Testament (OT), but then asked,
“Why don’t today’s Judeo-Christians believe in slavery and filicide?” The
reason why some of these things prohibited in the OT would not be carried over
is simply because some of them were ceremonial and civil laws of the people in
the days. Only moral laws transcend cultures and people; ceremonial and civil
laws do not, albeit, new societies could borrow their concepts to build upon.
The society nowadays has its own decency laws.

He falters greatly in his attempt to interpret and
apply these verses, “Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural,
and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women,
were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with
men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.” He
quibbles from these verses which clearly prohibit a man from having intercourse
with another man and a woman having intercourse with another woman by arguing
that, “many church-married, monogamous, man-woman, devout Christian couples
engage in acts once thought perversion.” That does not eliminate the crux of
this passage. It is almost as if he was saying, “I know that the Bible
prohibits homosexuality, but there are other people who are doing bad things
too. I know I was speeding, but there were other people driving on the HOV lane
too, officer.” Two wrongs do not a right make, Easterbrook!

The author said that “Beyond
this, Paul frowned on all sexual interaction, including by men and women
married to each other. (I Corinthians 7:29.)” Indeed, Paul did as his personal
opinion. Paul was speaking about the encumbrance of marriage to the
accomplishment of the work of God and not on the type or nature of sex. In
homosexuality, we are dealing with the type of sex, which is prohibited.
Therefore, Easterbrook has once again misused the bible in his application.

He gets it again wrong
that sex was absent from the New Testament. Sex didn’t seem very important to
Jesus’ followers because the glory of heaven outweighed a million coituses, but
their heathen compatriots basked themselves in orgies and all sorts of
debaucheries because in this world only, they had hope. Carpe Diem was their
devilry, so they subconsciously muttered, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow
we die.” Thus, sex is not absent from the New Testament (NT).

It is true that the key
word in Romans 1:26-27 is “natural,” but it is in usage rather than in nature.
It says clearly, “Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and
in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse…”

The word “natural”
describes the noun “intercourse.” It is not dealing with one’s sexuality; it is
dealing with one’s proclivity. Jesus said, “But from the beginning of creation,
‘God made them male and female.’” (Mark 10:6). That is their sexuality; it is
natural. That is the way they were made. The Bible reads, “Therefore, a man
leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they become one
flesh.” People are naturally born male or female, except in cases of anomalies,
and they are expected to have intercourse with the opposite sex. That is the
natural way. This should settle the preference issue because the
prescription is clear; a man should have sexual intercourse with a female and a
female should have sexual intercourse with a male. If people decide to do the
contrary, they operate in the realm of the unnatural. In so doing, they will
receive due penalty for their error.

The author again goes
back to false analogies by alluding to Christians who divorce despite Matthew
5:32 and the impossibility of the rich entering into heaven (Matthew 19:24).
Look, impossible things to men are possible to God (Luke 18:27), especially
when God is the one calling men unto salvation (2 Thessalonians 2:13). Although
in both situations there is great difficulty in achieving the kingdom, they do
not upgrade homosexuality to righteousness. No matter what the evil the
Christian right or liberals commit, their acts do not upgrade homosexuality to
a God-approved practice. It was so in the beginning, it is so now, so shall it
be till the end.

However, I do agree with
Easterbrook that “Jesus summed up Christian theology in one sentence: ‘This is
my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.’” Nevertheless,
love does not exempt admonishment. Paul told the Colossians, “Let the word of
Christ dwell in you richly; teach and admonish one another in all wisdom;
and with gratitude in your hearts sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs to
God.” (Colossians 3:16), and Ezekiel told the Israelites:

Mortal, I have made you a sentinel for the house
of Israel; whenever you hear a word from my mouth, you shall give them warning
from me. 18If I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die’, and you give
them no warning, and do not speak to warn the wicked from their wicked way, in
order to save their life, those wicked persons shall die for their iniquity;
but their blood I will require at your hand. 19 But if you warn the
wicked, and they do not turn from their wickedness, or from their wicked way,
they shall die for their iniquity; but you will have saved your life. 20Again,
if the righteous turn from their righteousness and commit iniquity, and I lay a
stumbling-block before them, they shall die; because you have not warned them,
they shall die for their sin, and their righteous deeds that they have done
shall not be remembered; but their blood I will require at your hand. (Ezekiel
3:17-20).

Easterbrook
and co, if you hear the word of the Lord, you should not harden your heart. Homosexuality
was an evil practice then, it is now, and it will be forever.

Until then, Kim Davis
and Easterbrook are both wrong.

St
Arrey of Ntenako.

“Bonyfish beware because the same net that caught the jawless fish, caught the cartilaginous fish” (Hamilton Ayuk).
Beware earthly paradise seekers because there is a serpent in every paradise"(Hamilton Ayuk).
"If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." (I Cor 15:19).
"It is not how well you know a person; it is how well you treat them that they will live longer and happier with you." Hamilton Ayuk.
Idle people write, idler people read, and idlest people read and whine that idle people are taking their time (Hamilton Ayuk).

Friday, September 4, 2015

It is my belief that the Bible prohibits
gay marriage, but Kim Davis’s reaction seems a little bit preposterous. The fact that she has been married four times
waters down a great deal her moral authority. Furthermore, when a hostile
crowd came to Joash to complain that his son, Gideon had destroyed the
temple of Baal, he told them, “…Will ye plead for Baal? Will ye save him? He
that will plead for him, let him be put to death whilstit is yetmorning: if hebea
god, let him plead for himself, because onehath
cast down his altar (Judges 6:31).” Is God that too weak to defend Himself? I believe that in the face of a conflict between the authority of man and that of
God, Christians “ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). In one of my
articles, “When Should Christians Disobey Their Government?” I explained that Christians
could disobey the law of man, if it conflicts with the law of God, but Kim Davis’
situation is very different.

She is an elected official. Which means that she campaigned for the position and knew the job responsibilities. The
constitution is very clear about the separation of church and state. Reading what
Christians write when I disagree with them on conservative websites, I definitely
agree that there should be clear separation between church and state. This is
serious because you cannot imagine a Muslim clerk refusing a license to women because it goes contrary to his beliefs that
women should not drive, or imagine an atheist refusing a marriage license to Christians
because they believe in God, something totally against her religion. Let us say
that there is a county clerk out there who does not believe in digamy, and she
refuses to issue marriage license to people who have been divorced because it
is against her belief, even once. Would Kim Davis love the idea?

Kim Davis’ situation is different from
the case of Daniel, Meshack, Shadrack and Abednego or even the disciples. In this
case, you have the choice to resign. In theirs, they had to bow or die. The
choice she had was either to sign the license or resign. By signing those licenses,
Kim’s faith is not affected in anyway. It is not about heaven or hell, salvation or damnation. It is a personal choice that each of us must makes. Jesus was a prime example on how to
handle a law that you disagreed with, and you had a choice to obey, without it
affecting your trust and belief in God.

There are times when a Christian can
disobey the government. That is if the law of man conflicts with the law of God, and she/he has no way out of it. In this case, she has two alternatives: resign
and not partake in their evil or remain and issue the licenses. However, she
cannot remain and then refuse to issue the licenses because it would be
disobedience to authority. It is on basis of that doctrine that Jesus paid his
taxes. His disciples did not want him to pay taxes, but he advised them, “Render
to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are
God's."

There is an earthly authority called
Caesar, and we must give to Caesar what is Caesar and to God what is God (Matthew 22:21). It simply means that the
Christians are not exempt from obeying the rules of their earthly governments
when they do not infract the laws of God. Sometimes though, the Christians will
not be committing sin if they disobey certain laws, but because they are not
inherently sinful, though inconvenient, they should respect them for the sake
of peace and societal tact (Matthew 17:27).

The time to fight this battle physically
has passed. Now that it has become the law of the land, the Christians must
kowtow but wrestle the “principalities, against powers, against the rulers of
the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in highplaces” that have taken a stranglehold
of this country. In general, the Christians must supplicate, pray and intercede
for all men, including kings and all those in authority, whether we agree with
them or not, so that we may lead a quiet and peaceably life on earth (I Timothy 2:1-2; I Peter. 2:13-15, 17). Remember that your peace shall depend upon the land
in which you dwell (Jeremiah 29:7). The law of the spirit governs the spiritual man,
and the law of the flesh governs the physical man (Romans 7:23; Galatians 5:16). The
Christians cannot be taken out of the world; consequently, they can only be
preserved from evil because they are not of this world (John 17:15-17).

Nonetheless, although she is not right, she does not deserve jail time.

Until
then, I believe that she has misunderstood the word.

St Arrey of Ntenako

“Bonyfish beware because the same net that caught the jawless fish, caught the cartilaginous fish” (Hamilton Ayuk).
Beware earthly paradise seekers because there is a serpent in every paradise"(Hamilton Ayuk).
"If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." (I Cor 15:19).
"It is not how well you know a person; it is how well you treat them that they will live longer and happier with you." Hamilton Ayuk.
Idle people write, idler people read, and idlest people read and whine that idle people are taking their time (Hamilton Ayuk).

Wednesday, September 2, 2015

This question to me is very simple to answer.
The bible does not prohibit remarriage because it gives reasons why one could
divorce and remarry. If you were voluntarily sent away by your spouse, you
could remarry (Deut 24:2). The woman was only prohibited from remarrying her
ex-husband (Deut 24:4; Jer 3:1). Another instance one could remarry is if they
divorced an adulterous spouse (Mt 19:9). The third was if a spouse deserts or
abandons her marital home and absconds, the remaining spouse can remarry (I Cor
7:15). Therefore, my task will be to elucidate the points above.

In Deuteronomy 24:2, marriage is used euphemistically.
The divorced woman can remarry if sent away. For example, if your husband
divorced you, you had the right to remarry. That explains why some couples wait
for their spouses to engage the divorce process. I saw a couple one time who
were holding up their divorce, so they could have grounds for remarriage
grounds. They said that they were
separated. I asked the husband why he did not just divorce his wife to restart
from zero, and he told me that if he did, he would be ineligible for
remarriage, I was surprised.

God prohibited a man from marrying a
sister in law as retribution or while her sister was still alive (Lev 18:18).
That does not mean that he prohibited digamy altogether. Let me use an example
that would be current. If someone said; “do not marry your sister in-law to
make her angry or while your ex-wife (who is her sister) is still alive, they
are not saying you cannot remarry at all. It actually means that you can
remarry on conditions that it is not a form of retribution or that your sister
in-law is still alive.

However, there are two conditions: one,
you should not remarry your ex’s wife sister just because you want to make her
angry and 2, you cannot married your ex-wife’s sister while she is still
alive. In England, there was the
Deceased wife’s Act that allowed a man to marry his dead’s wife’s sister which
was prohibited originally.

Nonetheless, God prohibited digamy (Lev 18.6). By prohibiting incestuous marriages, God
automatically prohibited any remarriage to siblings (Lev 18:18). Marrying sister
in law while her sister was still alive. You must remember that these laws were
ceremonial laws which do not transcend cultures. The second condition for
remarriage was actually given by Jesus.

He said, ‘And I say unto you, whosoever
shall put away his wife, exceptit
befor fornication, and shall
marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away
doth commit adultery Mt 19:9.” If you divorce your wife for any other reason other
than adultery and you remarry, you have committed adultery. Take note that the
prohibition is not on remarriage, it is on the reason for the divorce. Divorce
per se is wrong; it was not in the original plan of God. It became tolerated
rather than prescribed due. Consequently, due to the hardness of our hearts, we
divorce, but the condition for remarriage are still there. The third condition
was given by Paul.

In I Corinthians 7:10-15, 39. Paul is
against divorce as ordered by the Lord. However, if she runs away, she should
remain single or she should go back to her husband. The husband should not put
his way away. It is important to remember that at this time in that culture,
most men married women. So only the man had the right to divorce their wife. If
you wife or husband decides to divorce and go away, the remaining spouse is
free to remarry. If remarriages was
altogether evil, Paul would not have suggested as a personal opinion. Why is she
no more under bondage? I want you to follow me slowly. A marriage is a bond in
love that is sexually administered.

There are five elements that make up a
covenant: agreement, oath, sacrifice, witness
and feast. God is the executioner of every covenant because every
covenant is supposed to be eternal and only one who is eternal can over see it.
Now, if one person leaves the covenant, he or she is considered dead. God
cannot no more excuse the covenant because one party is dead, so the person who
is alive becomes free (I Cor 7:39); otherwise, the widow would not be eligible
to remarry. That is why Paul makes an explicit explanation to the Romans (Rom
7:2-3). By quitting the covenant of the
Law, man becomes dead to sin in Christ. He is resurrected in the covenant of
grace; whereby he becomes a new creature; behold all things have become new.

We have to reconcile Mt 5:32 and Mt 19:9
and I Cor 7: 10-15, 39; otherwise, the Bible will be showing a lot of contradiction.
Even though adultery dissolved the bond, the people are still married before
God until there is a bill of divorcement which now puts an end to the covenant
as if one or both parties were dead. That is why Mark adds, “against her (Mk
10:11).” In doing so, we can safely conclude that God tolerates digamy in those
three conditions, if the spouse was chased away, if the spouse absconded or if
the spouse was caught in adultery.

Until then, I hope this answers your question.

St Arrey of Ntenako

“Bonyfish beware because the same net that caught the jawless fish, caught the cartilaginous fish” (Hamilton Ayuk).
Beware earthly paradise seekers because there is a serpent in every paradise"(Hamilton Ayuk).
"If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." (I Cor 15:19).
"It is not how well you know a person; it is how well you treat them that they will live longer and happier with you." Hamilton Ayuk.
Idle people write, idler people read, and idlest people read and whine that idle people are taking their time (Hamilton Ayuk).

“Bonyfish beware because the same net that caught the jawless fish, caught the cartilaginous fish” (Hamilton Ayuk).
Beware earthly paradise seekers because there is a serpent in every paradise"(Hamilton Ayuk).
"If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." (I Cor 15:19).
"It is not how well you know a person; it is how well you treat them that they will live longer and happier with you." Hamilton Ayuk.
Idle people write, idler people read, and idlest people read and whine that idle people are taking their time (Hamilton Ayuk).

“Bonyfish beware because the same net that caught the jawless fish, caught the cartilaginous fish” (Hamilton Ayuk).
Beware earthly paradise seekers because there is a serpent in every paradise"(Hamilton Ayuk).
"If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." (I Cor 15:19).
"It is not how well you know a person; it is how well you treat them that they will live longer and happier with you." Hamilton Ayuk.
Idle people write, idler people read, and idlest people read and whine that idle people are taking their time (Hamilton Ayuk).

Disqus for http://princehamilton.blogspot.com/

Publications

Loading...

What i Look Like

Followers

Donations

I receive at least 1200 views a day (some days 3000), and some of you visit many times a week. If just 50 of you could contribute $5 daily, you will encourage my self publication. You know that research takes time. To answer most questions, I have to read and listen to at least 300 Bible verses each time. You can make a one time donation or become a regular supporter of this ministry. Furthermore, you could either buy one or both of my "Common Mistakes in Theology" or "Real Tales of Real People"( if you are not into religion). If you cannot do any of these yourself, you could get someone you know to do one or all because I need your support."For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward." I Tim 5:18.

Join the Conversation.

You should feel free to write your own contrary view on any article, and I will publish it.